The Ostroy Report is a fresh, aggressive voice for Democrats and a watchdog of the Republican Party and its President-elect Donald Trump.

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Delay Indictment Signals End of a GOP Era

Embattled House Leader Tom Delay (TX) has been indicted on one-count of criminal conspiracy related to his campaign finance schemes. California Rep. David Dreier will step in to temporarily replace Delay in his leadership post. This is a wonderful day for America, as justice is being served. And, the indictment also serves as the official beginning of the end for the Republican Party's political control as we know it today. The 'party' is over, in more ways than one. Andy

40 Comments:

So because you disagree with his politics, that makes him guilty. Ronnie Earl is known as a partisan hack. We are getting to a point where partisanship trumps all ethics, rules and even laws as seen in the illegal checking of Maryland GOP Lt. Governor's credit report by Chuck Schumer's aides(of course the liberal media refuses to report it - more partisanship).

This corrupt pompous ass is getting his and then Frist is next in line. If there is a god as the Bible Bangers in the Red States suggest the next indictments coming down will be for Rove and Libby. The party is over for the GOP. These corrupt bastards are gonna be shown for what they are just in time for the '06 elections

Hey..All I can stand..go stand in the corner, stick your fingers in your ears and hum..bet you thought Maxwell Smart was a real CIA agent...I have learned one thing..people like you do not read anything....you get your news and opinions straight from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Pat Robertson....

The persistent inability to change one’s views when confronted with solid proofs that those views are in error is one of the key, defining characteristics of mental illness and/or personality disorder

2 key points.1. As posted above, 11 of 15 of Earle's convictions were of Democrats. (74.5%)2. Look at Delay's statements. he denied ever having a role in TRMPAC yet earlier said he founded it, organized it, etc...

Only a dishonest neocon could claim that a prosecutor who has spent most of his 27 years going after Democrats is somehow biased against republicans.

The TRMPAC acronym sounds to a Spanish speaking person like the word we use for 'trap' or 'treachery'. DeLay may not have known what it sounded like, but he certainly knew what it was supposed to do. And then he got caught! Arriba, arriba, arriba!

Let the greedheads and sociopaths say what they want. Why defend this lawyer? SO WHAT if the prosecution is "partisan" (which it is not)?Like Republicans didn't hound Bill in a PARTISAN WITCH-HUNT?? They can now all officially and with this partisan's push go straight to Hell.Let Dante sort them out.

If he has only prosecuted 13 Texas democrats, then I know he is a hack. Someone needs to light a fire under this guy. As for the grand jury indictment, Delay was packaged into this indictment. You get your facts straight. How many of you actually read the indictment. It talks alot about the actions of the other 2 defendants in the case, but nothing about Delay in the body itself, except for some waiver he gave in the process. But he is a republican so facts don't matter to you guys. That is ok, you have freedom of speech. I did not hear any outrage from the left about Sandy Berger or the Schumer aides illegally invading Steele's privacy by feloniously checking his credit report under false pretences. If I see real proof (not partisan smoke) of any GOP doing illegal activity, I would be the first to denounce it and call for a resignation. The left gives free passes to their own and then wonders why nobody takes them seriously.

Read the indictment "Stand"... The point is: There's been an indictment MADE because of EVIDENCE of WRONGDOING by DELAY and two cohorts. Why is it that, if something LEGAL happens to a Republican, it's only because the Dems/liberals are whinning. Me thinks your argument would not stand in court. Legal Action, such as indictments, happen for a reason, bucko. Let's see, how many Republicans have been caught in the legal net in the past few weeks... Gov. Taft, Cunningham from CA, Abramoff, Frist, oh, yeah, the guy from the budget management dept., possibly Ney, Burns, Norquist, some good old boys in OHIO... ooh and lets not forget the delicious possibility of Rove gee, do you detect a pattern? PS Love the quote on mental illness... so true, so true...

11 of those criminal politicians were democrats, and simple math will show that only >4< criminal politicians were repugnican.

The non-morons will correctly understand that if Ronnie Earle is partisan, then Ronnie Earle is biased against democrats.

For the repugnicans: If Ronnie Earle is a partisan hack, the historical record proves that he is a >REPUGNICAN< hack.

The fact that delay is far too corrupt for a repugnican hack to ignore, speaks infinite volumes as to how corrupt delay and the vast majority of repugnicans are.

The repugnicans can try to spin this in every which way, But in this case (as in most cases) reality will undercut corrupt repugnican propaganda.

Ronnie Earle has an unbroken history of integrity- a word as least as hated by repugnicans as the word of Jesus Christ is hated by repugnicans.

There is not a single repugnican in the USA who posesses a nanobit of the integrity of Ronnie Earle, and all repugnicans are at extreme risk of an immediate lightning bolt by invoking God while working overtime to destroy EVERYTHING that Jesus commanded Christians to do.

You repugnican trolls should go away, and post in the anti-christ, pro-satan, and pro-repugnican sites.

Face it- A vote for a repugnican is a vote for satan. You >KNOW< that.

>WE< know that.

You stoopid repugnican bitches suck Satan's love muscle as if your lives depended upon it. And the best evidence available proves that repugnicans >MUST< put a hermetic liplock on Satan's love-muscle in the moronic hope that Satan will defeat God in the next 2 years, and all repugnicans will inherit heaven.

Ooh, forgot the Republican politican from Oregon who just plead guilty.... um,, there's more of that pattern again oh and those Republican Governors from um let's see... Kentucky, Ohio, was it Illinois? and ooh the Republican worker from... was it Conn? Wow, I'm getting tired trying to recall all of the Republican BS that's been exposed!

I read you bio. You say you like good writing and get along with most people unless they are complete fools. FYI, a lot is two words not one (alot). That's something you should have learned in first grade. Sounds like you should get along very well with complete fools. Any Republican should feel ashamed to chide others about ethics since over the past five years they have proven they have none.

Ummmh...not so fast! While I rejoice at the imminent demise of The Hammer and so many of his ilk, there will still be plenty of corrupt politicians left alive.

I agree that the Repubs seem to have refined corruption and chicanery to an art form, there are plenty of Democrats who are no slouches in that area. I can't help thinking that this is the natural result of a 2-party system wherein both parties feed at the same trough and play the same partisan games.

I have to laugh at how blindly partisan politicos on both sides of the spectrum [some 'spectrum'...only 2 points on it!] lash out at the 'opposing' party's office holders. For example, it appears that many Democrats have fallen head-over-heels in love with Hillary Clinton, while all the time she continues to distance herself from what USED to be considered Democratic Party positions on issues...back when the Democratic Party used to WIN elections with the support of labor, civil libertarians, and other progressives. She spends so much energy trying to prove that she's NOT a liberal, that she ends up proving she's not even a centrist Democrat. I'll admit, my mind boggles at the hypocrisy.

When 2 parties dominate, as they do in the US, you almost can't avoid a polarized electorate. If we had run-off voting, something more like how we pick a party's nominee in the primary elections, the field would be open. More ideas, more choices to pick from. You also get a better idea, post vote, of where the electorate stands on issues.

I like to see corruption having its day in court, regardless of party.

scanning the news last evening, I got that old "Watergate" feeling. But this time, I think it is going to be much worse; there is much more at stake now than there was then, and more people are culpable. It isn't just the White House, this time.

This White House has more corrupt enablers in the Congress than Nixon ever had. Media careers will come to sudden and humiliating ends, before this is over.

Still, let us not deceive ourselves; this bunch will not go quietly into retirement, nor should we allow them too and for the same reason. They have conspired to commit impeachable and criminal offenses, knowingly and with obvious malice, not to mention utter contempt for all dissent in this country.

Nevermind, that the dissenters have been right about damned near everything from day one.

The vast majority of Americans now see that. Katrina blew the smoke away and the mirrors have been cracking for some time now.

What the incredulous Left began smashing 5 years ago, a Lawman will help bash to smitherines in October. Indictments will come down.

Let us hope that what's left of Democracy does not come with it. Better yet, be prepared for just that! What Katrina did to the Gulf Coast was stunning, no doubt. What Hurricane George could still do to the entire country is far worse.

One thing is for damn sure! The Bush administration "mis-underestimated" the American people. They are beginning to find that out. Scary times, for Halloween.

Anonymous, oh you got me with "alot". I guess it's time to throw in the towel. I notice when people are weak on their reasoning they start picking on spelling and grammar. "Alot" is an old habit I am aware of. Sheesh, get a life. Also, I don't know if it is the same anonymous (so many around here) but you told me to read the indictment. This was right after my post stated I did. I don't think anyone here has or they would concede my point. You also said "The point is: There's been an indictment MADE because of EVIDENCE of WRONGDOING..." Really, so if an indictment is made, the person is guilty in your eyes (Maybe in your mother country - the USSR before it fell) Did you immediately assume Bill Clinton was guilty when he was indicted via impeachment?

As for the rest of you and the numbers game. If you apply logic to those number you get one of the following:

- Earle is not a partisan hack, but since 74% of his prosecutions are democrats, they are that much more corrupt in Texas than the GOP - Earle is a partisan hack, but since Democrats are overwhelmingly more corrupt it is simply a numbers game.

So which one do you bias non-objective people choose? Or do you want to have your cake and eat it too?

Gouda, while I understand the sentiments of the run-off. In reality that would result in watered down candidates winning. I don't have much use for GOP moderates, which is why I have my share of complaints against Bush and Frist. I don't think much on your side likes Democrat moderates either. I say put out your best arguments, say what you are and let the people decide.

Dear "Stand" I meant I'D read the indictment. FYI - an indictment executed in Texas doesn't have to spell out the case. Never in the post did I say DeLay was guilty. No, I believe I pointed out all of the Republicans who have run afoul of the law in the past few weeks/months. I know I've missed a few going back into 2004. If you're going to argue a point do not jump to conclusions - it shoots big ragged holes in in what you're trying to get across. What I asked is, if you had detected a pattern of politicians who had been named in legal actions, probes, investigations, arrests, etc. Check it out, they are associated with the Republican party. If you agree that those named in legal actions belong to the Republican Party, will you draw some knowledge from that factual information and begin to question what is happening? Buy the solution to a question not just the emotion of it.

Oh and "Stand" May I suggest a quick study of vocabulary words such as: indictment, evidence, legal, arrest, criminal, and any other words pertaining to a legally generated action? West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary by William Statsky would be a good place to start.

Gee "Stand" I reread your last post. Nice try at trying to make a point. Nice touch, "USSR" there's that emotion being presented as truth. Ooh is that "spin" by any other name? Sorry, can't buy your conclusions, either. Come back when you've got more intrinsic and concrete factual knowledge under your belt. Then, perhaps you will be heard.

>>>>Gouda said... When 2 parties dominate, as they do in the US, you almost can't avoid a polarized electorate. If we had run-off voting, something more like how we pick a party's nominee in the primary elections, the field would be open. More ideas, more choices to pick from. You also get a better idea, post vote, of where the electorate stands on issues.

I like to see corruption having its day in court, regardless of party. >>>>>>>>>>>

Ahh...another brave and sensible soul who has not given up on democratic [small 'd'] ideals! Thank you, Gouda. Now, if we could only coax some of these die-hard 'major party' devotees out of their rut......

raginblue6>>>>>>>>>This White House has more corrupt enablers in the Congress than Nixon ever had. Media careers will come to sudden and humiliating ends, before this is over.>>>>>>>>

The most serious 'enablers' are the spineless Democrats who are so afraid of confronting these bums on the ISSUES, they are so afraid of making an unpopular move they don't know whether to shit or go blind. The few truly brave Democrats who have continued to fight the good fight against the POLICIES of this criminal administration have been left hanging by the so-called 'leadership'.

What this country needs is a genuine OPPOSITION Party; otherwise, we'll continue to have a politics of partisan-based corruption and mud-slinging, with both parties crying about what crooks the other guys are.

For the benefit of those who aren't sure what Instant Run-off Voting is:

Far from giving us 'watered-down' candidates, IRV would give us a choice (actually, several choices) among a broad range of political perspectives. It is a 'weighted' voting system that allows us to prioritize the candidates we would like to see elected. For example, in the 2004 Presidential election, rather than having only a choice between the insipid and the monstrous (i.e., Kerry and Dubya) we could have voted for other candidates who reflected our actual preferences.

One could vote for the Green candidate, the Libertarian candidate, the Natural Law candidate, the Socialist candidate, the Socialist-Worker candidate, or .....[you get the point]. Obviously, these candidacies represent a very wide spectrum of political views.

"But..but," you say, "if I were to vote for the 'Prohibition Party' candidate, I would just be throwing my vote away. The 'Prohibition Party' hasn't seen its candidate get any more than 3,000 votes nationwide in the past 20 elections! One of the major party candidates is certain to win, and if the wrong one wins I'd kill myself or at least flee the country; and I'd hate myself ever afterward for not supporting the 'lesser evil' major party candidate."

Not to worry...the beauty part of IRV is that voters would rank the candidates of their choice. I might give my First Choice vote to the 'Prohibition Party', but my Second Choice vote to the 'Flat Earth' Party, my Third Choice vote to the 'Socialist Party', my Fourth Choice vote to the 'Green Party', etc. while withholding my votes entirely from the monster on the Rethuglican ticket.

When it comes time to count the votes, we could do it in one of several ways. One way is, if no candidate wins a clear majority of First Choice votes, we would disqualify the candidate with the least number of First Choice votes and transfer those votes to the voter's Second Choice and so on, down the line until one candidate ends up with a majority of all votes cast. It sounds complicated, but similar systems have been used for years to good effect, and with the results reflecting the public mood or General Will much more accurately than the system that prevails under the 2-party duopoly we currently have.

I suggest anyone who is interested might want to "google" some term like "Instant Run-Off Voting" or "Weighted Voting" or even "Alternative Voting Systems" where one will find tons of information that proves we needn't be stuck with the current narrow "Lesser of Two Evils" system that the major parties would LOVE to maintain 'as is'.

Other things worth researching might be "Proportional Representation" where people who vote for a non-majority winning candidate will still be represented in proportion to their candidate's share of the vote. It's time to open up the process to make it more genuinely democratic and fair.

Lani Guiniere [sp.?], the woman Bill Clinton nominated for Attorney General early on in his administration, has researched and written extensively on the subject of alternative voting systems. Of course, apparatchiks in both major parties jumped all over her without even giving her a hearing; and Slick Willy (true to form) pulled the rug out from under her and left her hanging as soon as he realized the extent of the opposition.

Anyway, I'm sorry to be so long-winded (and probably confusing); but my point is that we should explore voting mechanisms that would allow us 'more voices and more choices' in our elections. It's worth checking out for anybody who is tryly interested in reforming this country's politics.

________________________________"I may be a clown Karl, but you are about to be indicted." -- Cindy Sheehan (in response to Karl Rove's charge that she is a 'clown')

Anonymous, while using tremendous effort on your brain to call my arguments lame, you are overlooking the circular logic and weak points you are spewing out.

'Dear "Stand" I meant I'D read the indictment. FYI - an indictment executed in Texas doesn't have to spell out the case' Answer: so you admit no case has been presented, yet you think Delay is guilty. My USSR statement is no longer spin, but reality by your own words.

'If you're going to argue a point do not jump to conclusions - it shoots big ragged holes in in what you're trying to get across. What I asked is, if you had detected a pattern of politicians who had been named in legal actions, probes, investigations, arrests, etc. Check it out, they are associated with the Republican party'

Answer: You are telling me not to jump to conclusions, when you admit you already have in the Delay case. You liberals love to play by godlike rules while tying your opponents hands behind their backs. Again your "pattern" is a pattern of accusations or indictments, while convictions close to zero. If we went by your logic then the Democrats would be painted by the same brush because of the Clintons, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Sandy Berger, etc. And compared to the previous administration the Bush administrations is white as the driven snow. Take a peek at this link to remind yourself of the corruption (indictments AND convictions): http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

'Oh and "Stand" May I suggest a quick study of vocabulary words such as: indictment, evidence, legal, arrest, criminal, and any other words pertaining to a legally generated action? West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary by William Statsky would be a good place to start.'Answer: Translation - 'oh yeah well your stupid'. When facts and arguments run dry, I guess you guys resort to name calling.

Anonymous, I suggest you study up on your facts. And this time, try not to be so selective in your retention of them. Of course if you just want to be a Democrat cheerleader instead of attempting objectivity that is your right. You can see plenty of criticism of the GOP leaders on my blog when deserved. You guys have covered your left eye and expect to be taken seriously. What a complete downer it will be for you when with all the GOP's problems they still mop up in the '06 and '08 elections. When that happens, this is why.

"Stand" while your level of vocabulary has risen, your obvious lack of seeing the point is still showing - Type all you want, throw that emotion around, call people names, decide that others have convicted Republicans without the benefit of trial, proclaim that the GOP will win in future elections, and all the other spouting you need to do to show off your superiority... You are still missing the point, your objective mind is still appears to be nonexistant, and some Republican politicians are still in legal hot water. Oh, would that be the point? - Some Republican politicians and associates are getting in trouble with the law.

Anon, you are hardly the one to lecture me about objectivity or a superiority complex, but if it makes you feel better I can handle it. I will also remember your definition of legal hot water the next time a democrat is investigated or indicted which is so frequent we won't be waiting long. Then we will see how objective you are. Find me an objective line on this blog or any of it's comments that are not mine and I will be surprised.

Also, when Delay's case is thrown out of court I am sure you will call the judge a political hack. Same as when Fitzgerald proclaims no laws were broken in the Plame case.

My point is that at the initial level of the legal system, nobody knows if there was a legal breach or if somebody is playing politics (by indicting or not indicting). To take an indictment seriously anymore when no evidence is presented makes one look like a rabid partisan.

All I know, All I can Stands, is that if a federal prosecutor had presented evidence to a grand jury and they were convinced enough by the evidence presented to swear out a criminal indictment with your name on it - you'd be taking it seriously and pissing your pants and so would your attorney, your family, your boss, and your bank account. This isn't a traffic ticket we're talking about. Partisanship has nothing to do with it. It has to do with criminal misconduct and some grand jurors felt it was blatant enough to swear out an indicment against DeLay, Ellis and a third party. Just because this discussion takes place on a professed liberal blog doesn't mean that education of the facts can't take place. Local, state, federal - that's the hierarchy or levels of legal action. Messing with the feds ain't necessarily a smart thing to do - even for DeLay and that's the bottom line to this. Class dismissed.

If I were an average citizen, yes I would take it seriously. In the realm of politics it is another arena. I am sure Delay takes it seriously that regardless of the validity of the charge, he must step down until this is over.

As for your gullible taking this grand jury seriously, remember Earle has tried to get 5 grand juries to rule an indictment and this is try number 6 on some nebulous conspiracy charge. The likelihood is that they did not understand the law of a conspiracy charge. It is probably as confusing and vague as the tax code. So in the end, just the right mix of people scratching their heads just decided Earle must know what he is talking about and voted to indict.

I am 100% confident if it were your guy, you would see it my way but you are under no such restraint yet. I am sure you will see Pelosi (she was already fined for an ethics breach) and Reid in the legal realm before it is over.

Well, that is all_i_can_stands on that subject so I am bowing out. Get the last word if you must.

For all of you, there is a great post on my blog about imposing deemocracy. Would welcome your comments.

Tee hee... "Stands" didn't pick up on the disinformation...The indictment is at the state level (Texas) not federal level...guess it goes to show Stands is more interested in spouting than in being factual... once an educator always an educator.

"Stands" must be joking if he thinks that Pelosi and Reid are anything like the dispicable exterminator Delay. The man is a criminal indicted or unindicted. He is a stain on our country's moral fibre. The hammer must be dropped once and for all.